OK, I know there are other FREDders here, and I know there are multiple techniques when doing this. Do you find it easier to build the mission step by step, from beginning to end, with ships and events placed pretty much as they happen (I do this) or do you perhaps do it a different way, eg. placing all the ships, then scripting the arrival cues, then the messages, etc. etc., or perhaps another way entirely?

Not that I've used FRED in almost two years, I'd say I always used the same method in any game I create missions for - Do everything as I go along, all events, scripting and detail goes in as the mission is put together. Afterwards I review what I've done, delete/change/add to it, and polish it off, get all the bugs out and walla.

Well I've never used FRED that much, and whenever I do try to make a coherent mission, I soon lose interest and/or patience. However, I tend to place the important stuff first, such as cap-ships and mission-critical fighters, then general dogfight stuff. I'm also a fan of adding general traffic to missions, such as freighters warping in and out, and so on.

I work on the major events of the mission: scripting the mission objectives, placing waypoints, docking, etc. Once everything us debugged and running smoothly I place the enemy fighter wings and test for balance.

I tend to place the main ships first as well. I then do what I think of as a balanced amount of combatants on each side. Though, I must admit, my missions usually involve about 15 test plays before I am happy with the balance

Flipside

Tests are like fritters - they're good.

And I'm surprised. There's more varyation than I would have expected.Anyone else?:



Edited By Black Wolf on Oct. 28 2003 at 02:20

How do I FRED? Badly probably

I usally put the main ships in first, get all the main events working first including all the various possible outcomes for success and failure.

After that I put the fighters etc to make the mission balanced.

I also tend to write the mission down on paper first to see if it work in theory first and work out the possable outcomes.

That's where I usually flunk out, I just like to boot up a program and go, which is proably the worst way of doing anything.

Flipside

Place ships, basic events, test a bit, more events, test more, majority of events, test a lot more, do the breifing, leave the mission alone for 2-3 months, come back, debreif, test, distribute, find errors, redistribute, add goals, add directives, redistribute, check spelling, redistribute, find out that the campaign editor didn't get set for ships and weapons, fix it, redistribute, get results from testers who are now very confused, take things into conideration, wait a month, finish mission, release to public, realize that public does not have tables required, distribute tables, eat, type long paragraph about how you made the mission and went on to typing about it.

Pretty much any way I want. Some missions I place the ships first and build around that; sometimes I do all the events and messages first, and occasionally I do the briefing first and then go from there. It depends on the mission, I guess.

Well I do everything that has purpose firstant capship docking or movement first then I add playerfighter and other allied functiions then add the oppent factor as needed per skill level................ anyway thats my 2 cents.......... :brows:

Edit: What the Hell happened to my ..............nevermine...hehehe